I would sell popcorn for 50 p a time for a small cup if there was a proper legal tussle over the name. Best way to destroy the brand, and you'd just end up with things like People's Labour Party and the Labour People's Party and Party. Labour. People.
Wonderful.
With T Blair pitching a comeback, surely there must be a chance of "New Labour" making an appearance?
TL:DR - there are more votes (and more genuinely struggling people) in Middle England than in Leafy London. The PM is listening and the voters can see it.
I am not a T. May fan, but she benefits from two things
1. She has been left a steaming pile of dog-sh1t by Cameron and she is having to clear up the mess. Many people are happy to give her the benefit of the doubt, as they accept much of the mess is not actually her fault.
2. She comes across as softer and gentler than Cameron (even though she is actually more right-wing). Appearances are everything in politics. Lower middle-class, as opposed to patrician Dave.
The Tory party are lucky to have got rid of Dave and George. Their time had come and had just about passed.
Poor old Shami. How are the mighty fallen. Just think of all the great figures in history who have hitched their wagon to to the wrong horse. Leni Reifenstahl could have directed Casablanca
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
but every day it is being tarnished just a bit more.
It is indeed. While the Tories are totally incapable of fielding a team competent enough to run a whelk stall. But at least they can spew hate at "Jezza". It's going to be an interesting few years.
Corbyn has become the person who will finally oversee the destruction of labour with his out of touch leftie politics and inability to address the major issues of the day and in particular immigration. Rabbitting on about foreign interventions or non interventions today does not chime with ordinary people.
Andy Burnham's speech this week about the absolute need for labour to adopt a policy of restricting immigration hits the target but there is going to be a blood bath of labour MP's when the election comes or sooner if an early election is called, as they will not only have no immigration policy but will not have a unified position on Europe.
On Europe the Irish Government may apply to the ECJ to rule on whether A50 is revokable. It seems a waste of time and money as it must be revokable if both parties agree, though how on earth the remainer's think that will happen as it would involve a whole new process of negotiation due to Cameron's reforms having died on the referendum vote
Post Brexit as the icy wind of economic failure bites
and education budgets are slashed
and the UK slips to the bottom of the worlds literacy tables
.....UKIP should thrive.
The Welsh Labour Party have managed all that without Brexit.
Education has been devolved to Wales since 1999, it has been continuously run by Labour.
Wales has performed worst of the 4 home nations in education.
Well lets keep our fingers crossed that exchanging our place at the top table of the largest trading block in the world for the camel herders of the Arabian Desert proves to be a shrewd move.
With Labour in charge of Wales, the country will be lucky to obtain such an exalted position as being treated as an equal by camel herders.
I would sell popcorn for 50 p a time for a small cup if there was a proper legal tussle over the name. Best way to destroy the brand, and you'd just end up with things like People's Labour Party and the Labour People's Party and Party. Labour. People.
Wonderful.
With T Blair pitching a comeback, surely there must be a chance of "New Labour" making an appearance?
That was what I was trying to get at with the third one. Remember when Blair did speeches without sentences?
I have to say on this rare occasion I have some sympathy for Jahadi Jez....these kind of demos are f##king stupid. No problem with protesting, but pulling silly stunts like this is childish.
Post Brexit as the icy wind of economic failure bites
and education budgets are slashed
and the UK slips to the bottom of the worlds literacy tables
.....UKIP should thrive.
The Welsh Labour Party have managed all that without Brexit.
Education has been devolved to Wales since 1999, it has been continuously run by Labour.
Wales has performed worst of the 4 home nations in education.
Well lets keep our fingers crossed that exchanging our place at the top table of the largest trading block in the world for the camel herders of the Arabian Desert proves to be a shrewd move.
With Labour in charge of Wales, the country will be lucky to obtain such an exalted position as being treated as an equal by camel herders.
Have you ever thought of standing?
Wales has a series of problems that are close to insurmountable, so I am very pessimistic about its future.
It is like Southern Italy without sunshine.
One of Wales' problems is continuous rule by the same party (which is bad wherever it occurs, and whatever is the party). It has led to an ingrained culture of corruption, cronyism and entitlement.
The Tories are in the low forties, Labour mid twenties. You can tweak that around the margins, but the big picture doesn't change.
So the most "establishment" party is on course to win an election with a landslide when it's irreparably divided, without a functioning leadership, without a clue what to do next, and widely held in contempt, landslide or no landslide. Trouble is coming. Pollsters don't understand that stuff. Pearly and "does his own thing" mophead aren't a long-term act.
The Corbynites I have spoken to appear to have a genuine belief that Jezza is the right leader to lead us into government.
I thought that they would secretly acknowledge that he is a dud, but that isn't what they think.
That is our problem.
Therefore the only way to get a change of leader is with Corbyn's consent - his choice of candidate on the ballot to offer a left policy position but delivered by a PM in waiting.
I know many on here think we'd still get walloped under that scenario, but I think that would give us a fighting chance of leading the next government.
Not a party member so I don't have any skin in the game, but it seems to me that Corbyn is the best leader available right now. Most of the problems that Labour faces were there before him. His contribution to the party's problems is debatable, but even if he is as bad as his fiercest critics suggest he is just making a bad situation worse. 2020 was lost before he put his ballot in.
So the question is whether Labour is better off trying to look like credible mainstream opposition now or looking to reinvent itself in some way. With the exception of Blair, all really successful Labour leaders have come from the left. Pulling in a lot of young energetic left wingers is a good way of getting a debate about a new direction started. Letting them have first hand experience of electoral failure as canvassers and candidates will be very educational for them. Some of them might come up with a new approach that none of us jaded old bastards would have thought of. After all Blairism won't work again and straight left wingery never worked in the first place. If Labour is going come back they need to try something that hasn't been tried before. Corbyn seems to me to be perfect leader to trigger of that kind of change.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
I have no idea why Trump won....no sneering liberal elitist stuff here...
/youtu.be/21A76_lpUHA
The US late-night "Comedy" shows, that were nigh-on unwatchable before the election, have now become parodies of themselves after it.
They really have no idea about what happens in the big place between California and New England. Satire is eating itself.
Baldwin's Trump act aside (which can be quite funny), most of not even remotely funny (and not as if plenty of material to go at).
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP...
I have this feeling that the Electoral College system would have been fine if Clinton had won...
I would sell popcorn for 50 p a time for a small cup if there was a proper legal tussle over the name. Best way to destroy the brand, and you'd just end up with things like People's Labour Party and the Labour People's Party and Party. Labour. People.
Wonderful.
With T Blair pitching a comeback, surely there must be a chance of "New Labour" making an appearance?
After their A8 immigration policy, I have heard people suggesting it should be "Cheap Labour"
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
Sky News coverage of the Corbyn speech today is a car crash of huge significance. Peter Tatchell may just have destroyed Corbyn
Three guesses who Tatchell works for.
I have no idea but he has certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons. He is speaking well on Sky and this bust up is going to headline all weekend
I met him a few years back, and he's so incredibly intense. All sinews standing out on his neck even when apparently relaxed. He's wiry like a bantam weight boxer too.
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP.
In what other countries with an elected president can someone lose the popular vote and win?
With the exception of Blair, all really successful Labour leaders have come from the left.
You can't be "really successful" without winning a General Election.
So that gives (1) Ramsay MacDonald - went into government with the Tories. (2) Clem Attlee. Passionate anti communist at home, set up the post-war peacetime alliance with the USA abroad. (3) Harold Wilson. Arch pragmatist hated by e.g. Tony Benn. (4) Tony Blair.
Er. That's it.
The left energises the base, and leaves the electorate cold. The pragmatic centre wins elections, and is hated and rejected by the base.
Jeremy Corbyn has the base more firmly than any Labour leader ever, probably. And he's got no chance with the electorate. The Labour Party has to choose. It's chosen Corbyn.
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP.
In what other countries with an elected president can someone lose the popular vote and win?
That's not what they claimed. A party can lose the popular vote under FPTP and win the election.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP.
In what other countries with an elected president can someone lose the popular vote and win?
Well we don't have an elected President but we do have a Prime Minister and Government and we have had them lose the popular vote and win the election. It happened in both 1951 and 1974
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
That was it...he is racist transphobic...that bloke who championed gay rights before they were even twinkles in their parents eyes...along with that well known bigot Germaine Greer.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
It is simply that when he did this sort of thing to Conservative speakers, it was ignored by the left - as a natural thing to occur. It is only un-natural (boom boom) when it happens to them.
A bunch of the hard lefty London types I know slightly - the types who are always up for a bit of "physical protest" - were utterly terrified and appalled by the first Countryside alliance march in London..... The peaceful one characterised by little old ladies trying to pay for the rubbish bags that they were being given by street cleaners to pick up rubbish. Apparently they (the trots) felt "intimidated" and "threatened" by large numbers of people they didn't like, being allowed to walk around in public.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
They weren't so much hard left, as extreme hardcore SJW - the ones who spend every waking moment trying to work out how many groups can be offended by other groups.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
They weren't so much hard left, as extreme hardcore SJW - the ones who spend every waking moment trying to work out how many groups can be offended by other groups.
TBH, I wouldn't cross Jenny Pitman types either - she'd have shrivelled them with a glance
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
It is simply that when he did this sort of thing to Conservative speakers, it was ignored by the left - as a natural thing to occur. It is only un-natural (boom boom) when it happens to them.
A bunch of the hard lefty London types I know slightly - the types who are always up for a bit of "physical protest" - were utterly terrified and appalled by the first Countryside alliance march in London..... The peaceful one characterised by little old ladies trying to pay for the rubbish bags that they were being given by street cleaners to pick up rubbish. Apparently they (the trots) felt "intimidated" and "threatened" by large numbers of people they didn't like, being allowed to walk around in public.
It was fascinating to watch his very clear explanation of why he thought the verdict in the Ashers bakery case was wrong recently. He drew a distinction between discriminating against individuals and discriminating against ideas. Real clarity of thought and an ability to get a message across.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
I am not driven by party bigotry. I vote Labour but I am not a member. Some actions cry out "spook job". They don't cry out greatness, genuineness, and bravery.
I can't remember any Tory leaders being targeted in this way. Papers were found in Switzerland which brought down Jonathan Aitken. A couple of UKIP leaders have been targeted, but not with pictures. Nigel Farage "decided" at the last moment not to attend the C4 debate on the eve of the referendum. Those kind of things don't rile me so much as when spooks, state or private, run little groups of fake banner wavers and then ensure the photos get massive media coverage. At one point one of these pseudo-groups really had it in for Muammar Gadhafi's family in London. They're fake, fake, fake - and I'd be happy to converse nicely with any Tories, Kippers or others who oppose such fakery.
I am not moaning at all. Thames House will be Thames House. I expect this stuff.
Tatchell reminds me of Jill Stein who when asked the best way to stop Trump replied about how best to stop Clinton.
@PlatoSaid - I've met him too and you're right, he is very wiry. He comes across as being in his own world, but he isn't.
On Topic. Labour Centrists actually have an option, one that would seperate Corbyn from his supporters & stop The Libdem Revival. They could swing behind The 48%, oppose Brexit & appeal to the mass of the members. Brexit is the one issue that most of Corbyns supporters disagree with him about. Unfortunately that would involve picking a fight with Labour voters in many "safe" Seats in The North & they just dont have the courage. Most of The Centrist "Leadership" seem determined to faff about in the muddled middle, not pleasing either side. To answer the question in the headline -"Oh Yes they can."
Those kind of things don't rile me so much as when spooks, state or private, run little groups of fake banner wavers and then ensure the photos get massive media coverage.
What?!?!
Ok, leaving aside for the moment whether 'spooks' can be private and not state, you genuinely characterize private groups pushing their agendas with stunts as being the same as spooks, a term denoting people involved in espionage and state deception?
Agree with their messages or not, agree with their targets or not, agree with their methods or not, that seems quite ridiculous. Stunts like that don't cry out 'spook job' to any rational person, they cry out 'obsessed/focused person/group seeking attention', for good or ill.
Off-topic: was just looking back at the US presidential polls, now we have fuller data. Clinton is currently at a 2.1% lead, which isn't going to change much now. Looking back at the RCP averages, they ended at +3.3%. However, I'm remembering 538's warning of herding on the final weekend. Looking at RCP's history .....
Labour's rulebook is stupid. It makes it damned hard to replace an incumbent. Corbyn's been challenged once and prevailed with ease.
I said a long time ago (well, a year or so, but it feels like a long time) that Labour MPs who aren't nuts should form a new official opposition party. Their prevarication is robbing them of the time necessary to form this party, and to establish it in the minds of the voters.
Suppose Labour lose, and Corbyn stays on. Will they rinse and repeat whilst UKIP and the Lib Dems rub their hands together, and the Conservatives are torn between whether they ought to cackle with glee or laugh maniacally?
I have no idea why Trump won....no sneering liberal elitist stuff here...
/youtu.be/21A76_lpUHA
The US late-night "Comedy" shows, that were nigh-on unwatchable before the election, have now become parodies of themselves after it.
They really have no idea about what happens in the big place between California and New England. Satire is eating itself.
Baldwin's Trump act aside (which can be quite funny), most of not even remotely funny (and not as if plenty of material to go at).
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP...
I have this feeling that the Electoral College system would have been fine if Clinton had won...
Yeah i saw that Daily Show. A serious sense of humour failure and fanning the very same anti democratic flames they were accusing the Trump supporters of fanning before the vote.
Of course if Hillary had won, they'd be back to laughing at the racists and homophobes in the religious states who disagree with BLM and transgender bathrooms.
Labour's rulebook is stupid. It makes it damned hard to replace an incumbent. Corbyn's been challenged once and prevailed with ease.
I said a long time ago (well, a year or so, but it feels like a long time) that Labour MPs who aren't nuts should form a new official opposition party. Their prevarication is robbing them of the time necessary to form this party, and to establish it in the minds of the voters.
Suppose Labour lose, and Corbyn stays on. Will they rinse and repeat whilst UKIP and the Lib Dems rub their hands together, and the Conservatives are torn between whether they ought to cackle with glee or laugh maniacally?
Mr Dancer, not sure you're aware but Time Commanders is back on BBC4 on Monday at 9pm.
The first episode is about one of the greatest shellackings in human history.
Watch it, I think it'll help educate you and fill in the gaps in your knowledge.
It's 202 BCE and Rome has had enough of the upstart Carthaginian, Hannibal. Desperate to end his 16-year campaign of war against the Republic, one of its greatest ever generals, Scipio, is charged with freeing Italy of this menace. Scipio elects to fight Hannibal in his homeland - forcing him to return to Africa to protect the city of Carthage itself.
This time, a team of wrestlers will attempt to rewrite history by defeating Scipio and keeping him from taking Carthage. As Hannibal and his Carthaginians, they'll be defending their home town. Up against them, a team of historical board game enthusiasts taking on the role of Romans in a fight that will set the course of European history for centuries to come.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
He's very obviously not transphobic, so accusing him of it annoys me intensely. It dilutes the views of people like me who genuinely are.
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
Off-topic: was just looking back at the US presidential polls, now we have fuller data. Clinton is currently at a 2.1% lead, which isn't going to change much now. Looking back at the RCP averages, they ended at +3.3%. However, I'm remembering 538's warning of herding on the final weekend. Looking at RCP's history .....
I'm not sure you can read two +3.3 as "herding". The sequence looks remarkably accurate to me.
The herding comment came from 538, the day before the election:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clinton-gains-and-the-polls-magically-converge/ "It’s worth raising an eyebrow, though, when the polls (other than the L.A. Times) show a range this tight at the end of an election, especially given that they’d diverged so much earlier in the campaign. That probably reflects some degree of herding — for instance, because pollsters stick surveys that seem to be outliers in a file drawer rather than publishing them."
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
I first read that as him talking about UKIP voters, but I think he is referring to the NEC and fringe loons isn't he?
Labour's rulebook is stupid. It makes it damned hard to replace an incumbent. Corbyn's been challenged once and prevailed with ease.
I said a long time ago (well, a year or so, but it feels like a long time) that Labour MPs who aren't nuts should form a new official opposition party. Their prevarication is robbing them of the time necessary to form this party, and to establish it in the minds of the voters.
Suppose Labour lose, and Corbyn stays on. Will they rinse and repeat whilst UKIP and the Lib Dems rub their hands together, and the Conservatives are torn between whether they ought to cackle with glee or laugh maniacally?
Its not difficult to replace Corbyn because of Labour's rulebook. Its difficult to replace Corbyn because he has the support of the majority of the party.
Abandoning Labour would be a really stupid thing for them to do, when they're still in a strong position to control it as soon as Corbyn steps down.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
Tatchell is unusual in that he campaigns against homophobia and racism by *anyone*. He doesn't subscribe to the racist theory of cultural relativism that says that you can't judge all people by the same standard.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
Didn't some hard lefty nutters "no platform" him because of these kind of opinions?
You spelt "students" wrong.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
He's very obviously not transphobic, so accusing him of it annoys me intensely. It dilutes the views of people like me who genuinely are.
It's a common issue with a lot of treating what may be inelegant or ignorant phrasing as equivalent to the truly detestable and hateful views.
There's every chance that this is a QTWTAIY. I have been backing Labour to score sub 20% at the next election (10/1 at Lads, was 12/1) and I can see two likely ways of collecting: they go into that election with Corbyn or they split.
This is not blind Toryism: I agree with @AlastairMeeks and others that the Tory position is also fragile because of Brexit. But better to have a fragile 45% than a fragile 25%.
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
Farage clearly now views UKIP as beneath him. And what about this comment?
One remark from the Christmas party season knocks insistently around my head. It came from Nigel Farage on a staircase in the Ritz. For those who didn’t enjoy 2016, a year of political revolution, he gleefully promised: ‘2017 will be a hell of a sight worse.’
Surely this all substantiates the rumour that he and Banks will attempt to create a new Trumpite party in the UK - nativist, anti-intellectual, protectionist, pro-Putin.
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
I first read that as him talking about UKIP voters, but I think he is referring to the NEC and fringe loons isn't he?
I thought it quite clearly referred to the oddballs that every party has, and not to the mainstream supporters.
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP.
In what other countries with an elected president can someone lose the popular vote and win?
I know it's not what you've asked but the UK has *twice* held elections post-war where the resultant PM was not from the party that won the most votes. From memory, they were 1951 and (one of the) 1974s
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
Much the same could be said by any retired leader of a political party eg Cameron.
Of course Farage is still leader of UKIP's representation at the European parliament. a not insignificant role.
There's every chance that this is a QTWTAIY. I have been backing Labour to score sub 20% at the next election (10/1 at Lads, was 12/1) and I can see two likely ways of collecting: they go into that election with Corbyn or they split.
This is not blind Toryism: I agree with @AlastairMeeks and others that the Tory position is also fragile because of Brexit. But better to have a fragile 45% than a fragile 25%.
Tories are unlikely to dominate. Expect 40% max. But Libs could reach 20% with UKIP at say, 10% then Labour under 20% is possible. I believe they will be about 24%.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
Also, when I saw this, I remember being told that "Executive Producer" is often more than a title, they rarely have anything to do with the programme beyond its conception / royalties.
Hasn't stopped CNN, Young Turks, etc banging on about how will Trump fit in the hours required to work on this show etc etc etc.
There are loads of stuff to bash Trump about, but at the moment the media still not learning. Precision bombing, not carpet bombing is required.
There's every chance that this is a QTWTAIY. I have been backing Labour to score sub 20% at the next election (10/1 at Lads, was 12/1) and I can see two likely ways of collecting: they go into that election with Corbyn or they split.
This is not blind Toryism: I agree with @AlastairMeeks and others that the Tory position is also fragile because of Brexit. But better to have a fragile 45% than a fragile 25%.
Tories are unlikely to dominate. Expect 40% max. But Libs could reach 20% with UKIP at say, 10% then Labour under 20% is possible. I believe they will be about 24%.
My central expectation for a non-split Labour is probably 22-23%.
Exactly. In what way would Syria be better off if we were busily dropping bombs on someone?
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, Labour has a clear problem of even getting attention at the moment - 75% of the public have taken a view on Corbyn and are not hearing much to make them reconsider. I don't think he will get anywhere by being slightly more centrist, compromising on this and that - rather, he actually needs to take a leaf out of Trump's book and champion measures suffciently radical to get coverage. The phasing out of fossil fuel car engines is an example - lots of people will be annoyed, but quite a few non-Labour voters will see it as interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's to avoid the disruption of changing the reference point whilst pretending that the reason for the reference point isn't actually such.
Whaddayaknow? It's Peter Tatchell. First he helps out against Robert Mugabe. Now he's doing his bit against Vladimir Putin - oh, and against Jeremy Corbyn. This is professional propaganda.
Tatchell is a great man and one of the bravest campaigners I have ever seen. We need more rather than fewer of his type of people in politics.
You must have a very low bar for ascribing "greatness".
No, I am just not driven by party bigotry like you. I judge people on their actions, not on which vested interest those actions hurt. For many years Tatchell was a thorn in the side of the right wing Governments of this country and I was just as pleased about that as I am about his actions these days.
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
I also respect Thatchell. Not sure if he is right on the substance this time though?
Has Corbyn really not called for a ceasefire? Or supported aid drops? Or condemned Russia?
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
Scroll down for the picture of pissed off looking blokes in fancy dress ( reindeer, snow man and a Santa's elf ) in Bristol...
At last nights research group Christmas night out, we found out how many PhD's it takes to split a restaurant bill. The answer is none, but fortunately the Prof's secretary could...
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
I hear it is now a pretty good game.
Have you got the new controllers for the Rift? I have tried all these things (except Magic Leap...but that is another matter), but when I tried the Rift it didn't have controllers.
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
I can't help from the Eve perspective but on its own merits E:D is a great game and highly recommended. I'm going to get the Oculus Rift soon to add to the experience.
When I nodded off, Prime Minister Cameron's Remain were winning the EU referendum according to the phone polls, Nigel Farage was wrecking leaves chances by mentioning immigration, Hilary Clinton was nailed on to be POTUS and Spurs were just about to finally finish above the Arsenal...
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
How many hours do you want from a game, Mr. Pagan? I put about a thousand hours into Elite Dangerous, but eventually became bored by it. It is a lovely game and I can imagine that it would be sensational with an OR, but the game play when you boil it down is very shallow.
So I would say go for it. You will have a lot of fun and wonderous graphics; just don't expect it to last for too long.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
How many hours do you want from a game, Mr. Pagan? I put about a thousand hours into Elite Dangerous, but eventually became bored by it. It is a lovely game and I can imagine that it would be sensational with an OR, but the game play when you boil it down is very shallow.
So I would say go for it. You will have a lot of fun and wonderous graphics; just don't expect it to last for too long.
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
Yes. I'm not opposed in principle to having some kind of standard calendar year system, although where you'd put the starting point for recordable human history who knows, but I struggle to see the point of BCE, if it is going to be the same a BC/AD. Why is that the 'common era'? If you're still using the purported date of birth of Christ as cutting off point, why bother pretending otherwise? I'm happy to be corrected, but there's probably more consensus on differentiating between early, high and late middle ages than why the split between CE and BCE is where it is (if you don't use Christ)
The point of BCE and CE is obvious, and surely a very sensible compromise.
It's not "obvious" at all. I've seen no reason so far to change something that already works perfectly well to something which works exactly the same way.
Use of CE and BCE recognises the dominant position of Christianity in much of the World, but AD is an abbreviation that non-Christians (and even possibly Unitarians) would be very uncomfortable in using.
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
How many hours do you want from a game, Mr. Pagan? I put about a thousand hours into Elite Dangerous, but eventually became bored by it. It is a lovely game and I can imagine that it would be sensational with an OR, but the game play when you boil it down is very shallow.
So I would say go for it. You will have a lot of fun and wonderous graphics; just don't expect it to last for too long.
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
Not the same as Deplorables. He is attacking the UKIP staff etc not their voters.
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
I hear it is now a pretty good game.
Have you got the new controllers for the Rift? I have tried all these things (except Magic Leap...but that is another matter), but when I tried the Rift it didn't have controllers.
havent got the controllers yet will wait to see how I like the rift
Totally off topic but I know we have a few that play here. Is elite dangerous worth getting from the point of view of an veteran Eve online player. Just treated myself to an oculus rift and trying to work out which games to get.
How many hours do you want from a game, Mr. Pagan? I put about a thousand hours into Elite Dangerous, but eventually became bored by it. It is a lovely game and I can imagine that it would be sensational with an OR, but the game play when you boil it down is very shallow.
So I would say go for it. You will have a lot of fun and wonderous graphics; just don't expect it to last for too long.
1000 hours entertainment for 25£ isnt bad value
General rule is $2/hr is a reasonable return, so 2.5c is awesome value.
Comments
1. She has been left a steaming pile of dog-sh1t by Cameron and she is having to clear up the mess. Many people are happy to give her the benefit of the doubt, as they accept much of the mess is not actually her fault.
2. She comes across as softer and gentler than Cameron (even though she is actually more right-wing). Appearances are everything in politics. Lower middle-class, as opposed to patrician Dave.
The Tory party are lucky to have got rid of Dave and George. Their time had come and had just about passed.
Andy Burnham's speech this week about the absolute need for labour to adopt a policy of restricting immigration hits the target but there is going to be a blood bath of labour MP's when the election comes or sooner if an early election is called, as they will not only have no immigration policy but will not have a unified position on Europe.
On Europe the Irish Government may apply to the ECJ to rule on whether A50 is revokable. It seems a waste of time and money as it must be revokable if both parties agree, though how on earth the remainer's think that will happen as it would involve a whole new process of negotiation due to Cameron's reforms having died on the referendum vote
@Maomentum_: Corbyn supporter: The White Helmets are funded by the Rothschilds. twitter.com/JonIronmonger/…
It is like Southern Italy without sunshine.
One of Wales' problems is continuous rule by the same party (which is bad wherever it occurs, and whatever is the party). It has led to an ingrained culture of corruption, cronyism and entitlement.
So the question is whether Labour is better off trying to look like credible mainstream opposition now or looking to reinvent itself in some way. With the exception of Blair, all really successful Labour leaders have come from the left. Pulling in a lot of young energetic left wingers is a good way of getting a debate about a new direction started. Letting them have first hand experience of electoral failure as canvassers and candidates will be very educational for them. Some of them might come up with a new approach that none of us jaded old bastards would have thought of. After all Blairism won't work again and straight left wingery never worked in the first place. If Labour is going come back they need to try something that hasn't been tried before. Corbyn seems to me to be perfect leader to trigger of that kind of change.
https://youtu.be/21A76_lpUHA
Corbyn gives speech. Car-crash ensues.
"oh yeah, that"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38273933
Anybody would think the US media was studiously impartial....and then this wikileaks stuff then overtook the media narrative.
"Somehow we under-sampled half the country." https://t.co/Kw3VUIGZIl
They really have no idea about what happens in the big place between California and New England. Satire is eating itself.
In Russia itself, the latest country with a regime that he's helping the Foreign Office target, everyone would know exactly where such a character was coming from. If someone in a room didn't know, someone else would knock the table and the inexperienced or slow-minded person would get the point immediately. The word "стукач" wouldn't have to be uttered.
No worries. They won't send Tatchell on a job to embarrass Tory leaders over Saudi or Hong Kong.
Give me a genuine person who disagrees with me any day of the week.
The Daily Show did a whole segment mocking the Electoral College system...you know that thing that the democracy of the US is built on for 200 years and urging Hamilton voters to oppose the will of the people...and oh lied about no other country in the world having anything like in their elections, where somebody can lose the popular vote and win...cough cough FPTP...
I have this feeling that the Electoral College system would have been fine if Clinton had won...
Unlike you he puts policies and principles before party. I am damn sure you would not be moaning like this if he were doing this at a Tory or UKIP news conference.
A human coiled spring.
So that gives (1) Ramsay MacDonald - went into government with the Tories. (2) Clem Attlee. Passionate anti communist at home, set up the post-war peacetime alliance with the USA abroad. (3) Harold Wilson. Arch pragmatist hated by e.g. Tony Benn. (4) Tony Blair.
Er. That's it.
The left energises the base, and leaves the electorate cold. The pragmatic centre wins elections, and is hated and rejected by the base.
Jeremy Corbyn has the base more firmly than any Labour leader ever, probably. And he's got no chance with the electorate. The Labour Party has to choose. It's chosen Corbyn.
This upsets people on the left who are cultural relativists.
(yes, the NUS - not just one university but the whole union of belmonts - no platformed him for being racist and transphobic.)
Marlon Solomon @supergutman 27m27 minutes ago
Disgusting tactics from Blairite Tatchell.
A bunch of the hard lefty London types I know slightly - the types who are always up for a bit of "physical protest" - were utterly terrified and appalled by the first Countryside alliance march in London..... The peaceful one characterised by little old ladies trying to pay for the rubbish bags that they were being given by street cleaners to pick up rubbish. Apparently they (the trots) felt "intimidated" and "threatened" by large numbers of people they didn't like, being allowed to walk around in public.
https://twitter.com/ForceIndiaF1/status/807262958988525568
I know a lot of ladies like this.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4019774/A-merry-Christmas-not-emergency-services-Carnage-streets-Britain-festive-party-season-gets-underway.html
Scroll down for the picture of pissed off looking blokes in fancy dress ( reindeer, snow man and a Santa's elf ) in Bristol...
I can't remember any Tory leaders being targeted in this way. Papers were found in Switzerland which brought down Jonathan Aitken. A couple of UKIP leaders have been targeted, but not with pictures. Nigel Farage "decided" at the last moment not to attend the C4 debate on the eve of the referendum. Those kind of things don't rile me so much as when spooks, state or private, run little groups of fake banner wavers and then ensure the photos get massive media coverage. At one point one of these pseudo-groups really had it in for Muammar Gadhafi's family in London. They're fake, fake, fake - and I'd be happy to converse nicely with any Tories, Kippers or others who oppose such fakery.
I am not moaning at all. Thames House will be Thames House. I expect this stuff.
Tatchell reminds me of Jill Stein who when asked the best way to stop Trump replied about how best to stop Clinton.
@PlatoSaid - I've met him too and you're right, he is very wiry. He comes across as being in his own world, but he isn't.
Labour Centrists actually have an option, one that would seperate Corbyn from his supporters & stop The Libdem Revival. They could swing behind The 48%, oppose Brexit & appeal to the mass of the members. Brexit is the one issue that most of Corbyns supporters disagree with him about.
Unfortunately that would involve picking a fight with Labour voters in many "safe" Seats in The North & they just dont have the courage. Most of The Centrist "Leadership" seem determined to faff about in the muddled middle, not pleasing either side.
To answer the question in the headline -"Oh Yes they can."
Ok, leaving aside for the moment whether 'spooks' can be private and not state, you genuinely characterize private groups pushing their agendas with stunts as being the same as spooks, a term denoting people involved in espionage and state deception?
Agree with their messages or not, agree with their targets or not, agree with their methods or not, that seems quite ridiculous. Stunts like that don't cry out 'spook job' to any rational person, they cry out 'obsessed/focused person/group seeking attention', for good or ill.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jan/03/like-a-beautiful-painting-image-of-new-years-mayhem-in-manchester-goes-viral
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html
.... Clinton in the final week averaged +2.2, 1.9, 2.0, 2.3, 2.2, 2.2, before said herding appears and we end up with +3.3 on the final two days.
For all the chest-beating, the national polls look to have been pretty accurate. Of course state polls were wildly wrong, but that's nothing new.
Labour's rulebook is stupid. It makes it damned hard to replace an incumbent. Corbyn's been challenged once and prevailed with ease.
I said a long time ago (well, a year or so, but it feels like a long time) that Labour MPs who aren't nuts should form a new official opposition party. Their prevarication is robbing them of the time necessary to form this party, and to establish it in the minds of the voters.
Suppose Labour lose, and Corbyn stays on. Will they rinse and repeat whilst UKIP and the Lib Dems rub their hands together, and the Conservatives are torn between whether they ought to cackle with glee or laugh maniacally?
Of course if Hillary had won, they'd be back to laughing at the racists and homophobes in the religious states who disagree with BLM and transgender bathrooms.
The first episode is about one of the greatest shellackings in human history.
Watch it, I think it'll help educate you and fill in the gaps in your knowledge.
It's 202 BCE and Rome has had enough of the upstart Carthaginian, Hannibal. Desperate to end his 16-year campaign of war against the Republic, one of its greatest ever generals, Scipio, is charged with freeing Italy of this menace. Scipio elects to fight Hannibal in his homeland - forcing him to return to Africa to protect the city of Carthage itself.
This time, a team of wrestlers will attempt to rewrite history by defeating Scipio and keeping him from taking Carthage. As Hannibal and his Carthaginians, they'll be defending their home town. Up against them, a team of historical board game enthusiasts taking on the role of Romans in a fight that will set the course of European history for centuries to come.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b084xym1
That said, it's a bloody despicable description. Before Common Era, FFS.
I saw the previous series (some time ago). The first was quite good but they fiddled with it too much in the second. We'll see how the third goes.
Could be wrong, but I think Cannae was one of the first battles they did. Hannibal preferred to Caesar at every turn
It dilutes the views of people like me who genuinely are.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/09/nigel-farage-scathing-attack-ukip-low-grade-people
“I am not having to deal with low-grade people every day. I am not responsible for what our branch secretary in Lower Slaughter said half-cut on Twitter last night – that isn’t my fault any more. I don’t have to go to eight-hour party executive meetings.
“I don’t have to spend my life dealing with people I would never have a drink with, who I would never employ and who use me as a vehicle for their own self-promotion."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clinton-gains-and-the-polls-magically-converge/
"It’s worth raising an eyebrow, though, when the polls (other than the L.A. Times) show a range this tight at the end of an election, especially given that they’d diverged so much earlier in the campaign. That probably reflects some degree of herding — for instance, because pollsters stick surveys that seem to be outliers in a file drawer rather than publishing them."
The attempt to remove BC/AD from dates is the ongoing plan by "liberals" to remove references to Christian heritage from our history.
Abandoning Labour would be a really stupid thing for them to do, when they're still in a strong position to control it as soon as Corbyn steps down.
The underlying spectrum is now:
Keen Leave: UKIP
Keen Remain: Lib Dems
Middle ground: Tories
This is not blind Toryism: I agree with @AlastairMeeks and others that the Tory position is also fragile because of Brexit. But better to have a fragile 45% than a fragile 25%.
One remark from the Christmas party season knocks insistently around my head. It came from Nigel Farage on a staircase in the Ritz. For those who didn’t enjoy 2016, a year of political revolution, he gleefully promised: ‘2017 will be a hell of a sight worse.’
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/what-can-nigel-farage-be-planning-to-wreck-in-2017/
Surely this all substantiates the rumour that he and Banks will attempt to create a new Trumpite party in the UK - nativist, anti-intellectual, protectionist, pro-Putin.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/redwb.jpg
Of course Farage is still leader of UKIP's representation at the European parliament. a not insignificant role.
Also, when I saw this, I remember being told that "Executive Producer" is often more than a title, they rarely have anything to do with the programme beyond its conception / royalties.
Hasn't stopped CNN, Young Turks, etc banging on about how will Trump fit in the hours required to work on this show etc etc etc.
There are loads of stuff to bash Trump about, but at the moment the media still not learning. Precision bombing, not carpet bombing is required.
At this point, it appears that Assad is going to win, and that's probably a lesser evil than indefinite civil war. It's certainly not so obvious that another option is better as to justify our intervention.
On topic, Labour has a clear problem of even getting attention at the moment - 75% of the public have taken a view on Corbyn and are not hearing much to make them reconsider. I don't think he will get anywhere by being slightly more centrist, compromising on this and that - rather, he actually needs to take a leaf out of Trump's book and champion measures suffciently radical to get coverage. The phasing out of fossil fuel car engines is an example - lots of people will be annoyed, but quite a few non-Labour voters will see it as interesting if feasible. I also think he has little to lose by adopting a "second Brexit referendum unless the terms are right" strategy.
Not sure if he is right on the substance this time though?
Has Corbyn really not called for a ceasefire? Or supported aid drops? Or condemned Russia?
Have you got the new controllers for the Rift? I have tried all these things (except Magic Leap...but that is another matter), but when I tried the Rift it didn't have controllers.
So I would say go for it. You will have a lot of fun and wonderous graphics; just don't expect it to last for too long.